Jennifer Bridwell-Rabb1, Bin Li1, Catherine L Drennan2,3,4. 1. Department of Chemistry, University of Michigan, 930 N University Avenue, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States. 2. Department of Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 3. Department of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 4. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States.
Abstract
The members of the radical S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) enzyme superfamily are responsible for catalyzing a diverse set of reactions in a multitude of biosynthetic pathways. Many members of this superfamily accomplish their transformations using the catalytic power of a 5'-deoxyadenosyl radical (5'-dAdo•), but there are also enzymes within this superfamily that bind auxiliary cofactors and extend the catalytic repertoire of SAM. In particular, the cobalamin (Cbl)-dependent class synergistically uses Cbl to facilitate challenging methylation and radical rearrangement reactions. Despite identification of this class by Sofia et al. 20 years ago, the low sequence identity between members has led to difficulty in predicting function of uncharacterized members, pinpointing catalytic residues, and elucidating reaction mechanisms. Here, we capitalize on the three recent structures of Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes that use common cofactors to facilitate ring contraction as well as radical-based and non-radical-based methylation reactions. With these three structures as a framework, we describe how the Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes repurpose the traditional SAM- and Cbl-binding motifs to form an active site where both Cbl and SAM can participate in catalysis. In addition, we describe how, in some cases, the classic SAM- and Cbl-binding motifs support the diverse functionality of this enzyme class, and finally, we define new motifs that are characteristic of Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes.
The members of the radical S-adenosylmethionine (SAM) enzyme superfamily are responsible for catalyzing a diverse set of reactions in a multitude of biosynthetic pathways. Many members of this superfamily accomplish their transformations using the catalytic power of a 5'-deoxyadenosyl radical (5'-dAdo•), but there are also enzymes within this superfamily that bind auxiliary cofactors and extend the catalytic repertoire of SAM. In particular, the cobalamin (Cbl)-dependent class synergistically uses Cbl to facilitate challenging methylation and radical rearrangement reactions. Despite identification of this class by Sofia et al. 20 years ago, the low sequence identity between members has led to difficulty in predicting function of uncharacterized members, pinpointing catalytic residues, and elucidating reaction mechanisms. Here, we capitalize on the three recent structures of Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes that use common cofactors to facilitate ring contraction as well as radical-based and non-radical-based methylation reactions. With these three structures as a framework, we describe how the Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes repurpose the traditional SAM- and Cbl-binding motifs to form an active site where both Cbl and SAM can participate in catalysis. In addition, we describe how, in some cases, the classic SAM- and Cbl-binding motifs support the diverse functionality of this enzyme class, and finally, we define new motifs that are characteristic of Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes.
The radical S-adenosylmethionine
(SAM) enzymes,
so-named by Sofia et al., are characterized by a conserved series
of Cys residues (Cys-X3-Cys-X2-Cys) that are
involved in coordinating a [4Fe–4S] cluster.[1] Most radical SAM enzymes reductively cleave SAM to form
a 5′-deoxyadenosyl radical (5′-dAdo•) and methionine
(Figure A). This reactive
radical species can be used to initiate catalysis in a wide range
of biosynthetic pathways, including those of vitamins, cofactors,
and antibiotics.[2] Current estimates suggest
that, despite the identification of only 645 radical SAM enzyme sequences
in the pioneering paper by Sofia et al., hundreds of thousands of
sequences are part of the radical SAM enzyme superfamily today (radicalsam.org). These enzymes vary
widely in their reactivity and, in many cases, invoke auxiliary cofactors
to expand their catalytic repertoire.[3] For
example, the glycyl radical activase pyruvate–formate lyase
activating enzyme (PFL-AE) employs a cation for catalysis,[4] and lipoyl synthase (LipA),[5] biotin synthase (BioB),[6] and
enzymes belonging to the “SPASM/TWITCH” class of the
radical SAM enzyme superfamily employ auxiliary Fe–S clusters.[7,8] Most notably, one of the largest classes of radical SAM enzymes,
also originally highlighted in the Sofia et al. paper, are typified
by a domain that has sequence similarity to proteins including methionine
synthase (MetH), glutamate mutase, and methyl–malonyl CoA mutase
that bind different flavors of Nature’s most beautiful cofactor,
vitamin B12, or cobalamin (Cbl).[1] The presence or absence of different axial ligands to the Co-containing
macrocyclic cofactor differentiates the types of Cbl that are found
in Nature, which include adenosyl (Ado)-Cbl, methyl (Me)-Cbl, and
open Cbl, which lacks an upper axial ligand.[9−11]
Figure 1
Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes are widespread in Nature and
showcase diverse reactivity. (A) [4Fe–4S] cluster-mediated
reductive cleavage of SAM results in formation of a spectroscopically
characterized organometallic intermediate and methionine (Ω).[66] (B) Sequence similarity network (SSN) for the
Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes is shown with an alignment score
of 60.[13−15] Nodes highlighted as pink squares represent the structurally
characterized enzymes OxsB,[18] TsrM,[20] and TokK.[21] The highlighted
nodes (blue circles) are enzymes that have been biochemically investigated.
The top right inset is a sub-SSN of the largest cluster from the main
SSN that is analyzed with a more stringent alignment score of 80.
The bottom right shows the complex structure of Cbl. (C) Reactions
catalyzed by the structurally characterized Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes include a radical rearrangement to form OXT-A (OxsB),
a non-radical based methylation of tryptophan (TsrM) that uses SAM
and generates methylated Trp and S-adenosylhomocysteine
(SAH), and a series of radical-dependent methylation reactions in
asparenomycin A biosynthesis (TokK). SSNs were visualized with cytoscape.[67]
Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes are widespread in Nature and
showcase diverse reactivity. (A) [4Fe–4S] cluster-mediated
reductive cleavage of SAM results in formation of a spectroscopically
characterized organometallic intermediate and methionine (Ω).[66] (B) Sequence similarity network (SSN) for the
Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes is shown with an alignment score
of 60.[13−15] Nodes highlighted as pink squares represent the structurally
characterized enzymes OxsB,[18] TsrM,[20] and TokK.[21] The highlighted
nodes (blue circles) are enzymes that have been biochemically investigated.
The top right inset is a sub-SSN of the largest cluster from the main
SSN that is analyzed with a more stringent alignment score of 80.
The bottom right shows the complex structure of Cbl. (C) Reactions
catalyzed by the structurally characterized Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes include a radical rearrangement to form OXT-A (OxsB),
a non-radical based methylation of tryptophan (TsrM) that uses SAM
and generates methylated Trp and S-adenosylhomocysteine
(SAH), and a series of radical-dependent methylation reactions in
asparenomycin A biosynthesis (TokK). SSNs were visualized with cytoscape.[67]Remarkably, today this
class of Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes,
which started as a founding list of 25 protein sequences that included
enzymes involved in the biosynthesis of oxetanocin A (OxsB), fosfomycin
(Fom3), fortimicin (Fms7), bacteriochlorophyll (BchE), and l-phosphinothricylalanylalanine (BcpD/PhpK),[1] has grown into a superfamily of its own. The large number
of annotated Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzyme sequences are now best
visualized and interpreted using a sequence similarity network (SSN),
which emphasizes the widespread use of these enzymes in Nature (Figure B).[12−15] Mapping of the biochemically and structurally characterized enzymes
onto such an SSN also highlights the vast unexplored sequence space
of this enzyme class (Figure B).[12−15] The lack of details regarding how members of the Cbl-dependent enzyme
class function is largely due to challenges associated with insolubility
of these enzymes, a shortage of information regarding their physiological
substrates, and lack of knowledge regarding what constitutes the active
form of an enzyme.[16,17]Consistent with what is
observed across the radical SAM enzyme
superfamily, the functions of the Cbl-dependent enzymes are diverse
(Figure B). The majority
of annotated Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes are proposed to use
radical SAM chemistry and MeCbl to methylate inert substrate centers.
Other members showcase more divergent functionality: OxsB is involved
in facilitating a complex radical rearrangement reaction,[18,19] and TsrM does not use radical chemistry at all[20] (Figure C). Recent advances including new purification strategies[17] and three structures of Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes that are implicated in radical rearrangement,[18] non-radical-based methylation,[20] and radical-based methylation[21] have laid the groundwork for understanding how these enzymes catalyze
their challenging reactions (Figure C). Here, we review the three recently determined structures
of Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes.[18,20,21] Through comparison of these structures with other
structurally characterized Cbl-binding and radical SAM proteins, we
detail the architectural features that support the use of both Cbl
and SAM in catalysis.[18,20,21] Further, we highlight how the traditional radical SAM- and Cbl-binding
motifs have been repurposed to support the diverse chemistry of the
Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes.
Extensive Reaction Scope
of Cbl-Dependent Radical
SAM Enzymes
As described above, most annotated Cbl-dependent
radical SAM enzymes
appear to be radical-based methylases, but the first structure determined
of any Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzyme was that of the non-methylase
OxsB.[18] This protein is part of the pathway
that produces the antiviral compound oxetenocin-A (OXT-A). OxsB is
involved in contracting the five-membered deoxyribose ring of 2′-deoxyadenosine-5′-monophosphate
(dAMP), 2′-deoxyadenosine-5′-diphosphate (dADP), and
2′-deoxyadenosine-5′-triphosphate (dATP) to form the
four-membered oxetane ring of OXT-A (Figure C).[18] The OxsB-mediated
ring contraction requires that one molecule of SAM is reductively
cleaved. The resulting 5′-dAdo• abstracts a hydrogen
atom from the 2′ position of the substrate to form 5′-dAdoH
and a ribose-derived radical species (Figure C).[18] Subsequent
rearrangement of the radical intermediate results in formation of
the oxetane ring. Although the need for Cbl in this transformation
is not immediately obvious, it is known that the presence of hydroxo
(HO)-Cbl is required for the reaction to occur.[18] Current proposals suggest that Cbl is involved in facilitating
the ring closure step via formation of a Co substrate adduct and/or
that Cbl is used as an electron acceptor for the product radical.[10,18] Of note, OXT-A production also relies on OxsB working in concert
with the HD domain phosphohydrolase enzyme OxsA and a promiscuous
cellular dehydrogenase (Figure C).[18,19,22]The second structure determined in this family was of a homologue
of the Streptomyces enzyme TsrM. Like
OxsB, TsrM from Kitasatospora setae does not perform a radical-based methylation. Instead, TsrM catalyzes
the methylation of l-tryptophan in the biosynthetic pathway
of thiostrepton using polar chemistry.[20,23] More specifically,
a proposed base-mediated removal of a proton from the C2 position
of l-tryptophan forms a carbanionic intermediate that displaces
a methyl cation from MeCbl (Figure C).[20] One molecule of SAM
is subsequently required to re-form MeCbl from Co(I)–Cbl at
the end of the catalytic cycle (Figure C).[20,23] The role of the radical SAM [4Fe–4S]
cluster in TsrM is currently unknown but is proposed to be important
for reducing adventitiously formed Co(II)–Cbl back to the Co(I)–Cbl
state for methylation and subsequent catalytic cycling.[20]The third Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzyme
to be structurally characterized
is TokK.[21,24] This methylase is implicated in catalyzing
serial methylation reactions to form the C6 isopropyl group of a carbapenem
scaffold in the biosynthesis of asparenomycin A (Figure C).[21] TokK is believed to perform radical-based methylation reactions,
the type of chemistry expected for the majority of Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes. In the proposed TokK mechanism, one molecule of SAM is
reductively cleaved to form 5′-dAdo•.[21,25−27] This species is used to generate a substrate radical
that is subsequently quenched via transfer of a methyl radical from
MeCbl.[21,25−27] A second molecule of
SAM and an electron are then used to regenerate MeCbl from Co(II)–Cbl
(Figure C).[21,25−27] Subsequent passes through this reaction sequence
would account for the iterative methylation reactions needed to complete
formation of the isopropyl group.[21]In addition to these three reactions, Cbl-dependent radical SAM
enzymes have been linked to many other pathways. Similar to OxsB,
both HpnJ and BchE do not catalyze methyl transfer reactions (Figure A). HpnJ from Burkholderia cenocepacia is proposed to mediate the
contraction of a six-membered oxane ring into a five-membered ring
in hopanoid biosynthesis.[28] BchE catalyzes
both oxidation of the C-131 carbon of Mg-protoporphyrin-IX
monomethylester and a subsequent cyclization reaction to form the
isocyclic ring of bacteriochlorophyll.[29,30] In addition,
the Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzyme, Kuste2803, has been identified
as a potential catalyst for formation of the cyclobutane rings of
ladderane lipids.[31] HpnJ, BchE, and the
ladderane biosynthetic enzyme cluster together in the main cluster
of the SSN away from OxsB (Figure B). This distinct clustering of these enzymes (Figure B) likely reflects
differences in substrates and also in enzyme mechanistic features.
Indeed, BchE catalyzes an oxygen insertion in addition to the radical
rearrangement reaction,[29,30] and HpnJ must contract
a six-membered ring of a large bacteriohopanetetrol glucosamine substrate
to form the five-membered ring of bacteriohopanetetrol cyclitol ether.[28] Regarding the need for Cbl in these reactions,
it is known that OxsB requires HOCbl for turnover[18] and that defects in Cbl biosynthesis disrupt bacteriochlorophyll
formation in two facultative anaerobes that use BchE.[29,30] However, the role and type of Cbl for these non-methylase reactions
is understudied. Similarly, TsrM is the only member of this enzyme
family that is currently known to function without radical chemistry,
but CloN6 and CouN6 also methylate sp2-hybridized carbon
centers[23,32] and thus may catalyze their methylations
using a TsrM-like mechanism (Figure B).[23] Despite the identification
of CloN6 and CouN6 in 2003,[32] they have
not been mechanistically or structurally investigated, leaving many
open questions regarding whether this non-radical-based mode of catalysis
will be used by additional members of this enzyme class.
Figure 2
Cbl-dependent
radical SAM enzymes catalyze a diverse set of reactions
that are important to pathways that produce environmentally and medically
relevant compounds. (A) Like OxsB, several Cbl-dependent radical SAM
enzymes including HpnJ and BchE function as non-methylases. (B) Like
TsrM, CloN6 and CouN6 have been proposed to use their cofactors to
catalyze a non-radical-based methylation reaction.[23] (C) Analogous to TokK, ThnK,[33] CysS,[34] Swb9,[36] BchQ,[37] and PoyB[38] have been suggested to catalyze multiple radical-based methylation
reactions. In the top panel, two methyl groups are added by ThnK (one
to the β-lactam ring and then one to the resultant methyl group,
which is shown in pink). TokK, on the other hand, is implicated in
forming the appended isopropyl moiety. (D) A large majority of Cbl-dependent
radical SAM enzymes are implicated in catalyzing single radical-based
methylation reactions.
Cbl-dependent
radical SAM enzymes catalyze a diverse set of reactions
that are important to pathways that produce environmentally and medically
relevant compounds. (A) Like OxsB, several Cbl-dependent radical SAM
enzymes including HpnJ and BchE function as non-methylases. (B) Like
TsrM, CloN6 and CouN6 have been proposed to use their cofactors to
catalyze a non-radical-based methylation reaction.[23] (C) Analogous to TokK, ThnK,[33] CysS,[34] Swb9,[36] BchQ,[37] and PoyB[38] have been suggested to catalyze multiple radical-based methylation
reactions. In the top panel, two methyl groups are added by ThnK (one
to the β-lactam ring and then one to the resultant methyl group,
which is shown in pink). TokK, on the other hand, is implicated in
forming the appended isopropyl moiety. (D) A large majority of Cbl-dependent
radical SAM enzymes are implicated in catalyzing single radical-based
methylation reactions.Akin to the reaction
catalyzed by TokK, enzymes that include ThnK,[33] CysS,[34] PctJ,[35] Swb9,[36] BchQ,[37] and PoyB[38] appear
to catalyze multiple methylation reactions on a substrate (Figure C). ThnK methylates
its substrate’s β-lactam ring and then methylates the
initially added methyl group,[33] and CysS
catalyzes iterative methylation reactions on a methyl group to form
ethyl-, isopropyl-, sec-butyl-, and tert-butyl-containing cystobactamids.[34] These
enzymes, along with PctJ and Swb9, cluster together in the SSN (Figure B). The physiological
substrate of Swb9 is unknown, but it has been proposed to iteratively
methylate a quinomcyin precursor to generate ethyl, isopropyl, and sec-butyl moieties.[36] PctJ is
thought to be involved in a late-stage methylation reaction in pactamycin
biosynthesis.[35] Outside of this cluster,
only two additional proteins, BchQ[37] and
PoyB,[38] have been implicated in catalyzing
serial methylation reactions (Figure B). BchQ adds one, two, or three methyl groups to the
C8-ethyl position of a bacteriochlorophyll c substrate,[37] and PoyB has been suggested to form the N-terminal tert-butyl group of polytheonamide A[38] (Figure C).Finally, there are also Cbl-dependent enzymes that, like
TokK,
are implicated in radical-based methylation reactions but only append
one methyl group to a substrate (Figure D). This category of methylases includes
Fom3, CndI, GenK/GntE/GenD1, Fms7, MoeK5, BchR, and HpnP/HpnR, which
catalyze methylation of carbon centers in the biosynthesis and tailoring
of fosfomycin,[39−41] chondrochloren B,[42] gentamicin
C1,[43−45] fortimicin A, moenomycin A,[46] bacteriochlorophyll c,[37] and hopanoids,[47] respectively. Each of
these proteins except GenD1, GntE, and CndI cluster together in the
SSN (Figures B and 2D). A more stringent threshold applied to this cluster
reveals colocalization of Fom3, MoeK5, and HpnJ as well as GenK and
Fms7 (Figures B and 2D). SD1168 is also found in this main cluster and
is proposed to catalyze either a C- or P-methylation, but its physiological
function and substrate remain unknown.[48] Related reactions are also catalyzed by a set of Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes found in a distinct cluster that are each involved in
amino acid side chain methylation in polytheonamide A (PoyC)[38] and bottromycin (BotRMT1, BotRMT2, and BotRMT3)
biosynthesis[49] (Figure D). Likewise, two additional pactamycin biosynthetic
genes, PctN and PctO, which have been proposed to catalyze methylation
reactions on the cyclopentane ring of a pactamycin precursor,[35] are also implicated in catalyzing a single radical-based
methylation but cluster in a distinct region of the SSN (Figure B). Last, BcpD and
PhpK are known as P-methylases.[50−52] Thus far, the PhpK homologue
from Kitasatospora phosalacinea has
been shown to require an electron donor and MeCbl for activity.[50] However, the physiological substrate of this
enzyme is still in debate[17] (Figure D).Thus, with just three
structures to represent this broad range
of divergent enzymes, it is clear that we still have a lot to learn
about the structure–function relationships in this enzyme class.
However, thus far, the three structures of OxsB, TsrM, and TokK have
revealed that these proteins use a modular architecture. They are
differentiated by architectural features including an N-terminal domain
of unknown function and C-terminal helical bundle in OxsB, as well
by the distinct C-terminal domains of TsrM and TokK that are involved
in substrate binding (Figure ). In general, the structures of OxsB, TsrM, and TokK are
related by the use of traditional Cbl-binding and radical SAM domains
that show subtle variations. As described below, these small changes
appear to support different uses of SAM and Cbl and different chemical
outcomes.
Figure 3
The Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes OxsB, TsrM, and TokK showcase
similar architectures that capitalize on the traditional Cbl-binding
and radical SAM domains.[18,20,21] (A) OxsB is composed of four domains: an N-terminal domain of unknown
function (deep mauve), a Cbl-binding domain (purple), a radical SAM
domain (dark teal), and a helix bundle domain (blue). (B) Structure
of a homologue of the Streptomyces enzyme
TsrM has a domain arrangement similar to that of OxsB but lacks the
N-terminal domain and has an abbreviated C-terminal helical bundle
domain (blue). (C) TokK also has a domain arrangement similar to that
of OxsB but again lacks the N-terminal domain and showcases a new
architecture in the C-terminal domain (blue). In all panels, Cbl is
shown as pink sticks, SAM (aza-SAM in TsrM and SAM cleavage products
in TokK) is shown in light blue sticks, and the radical SAM [4Fe–4S]
cluster is shown in orange and brown spheres.
The Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes OxsB, TsrM, and TokK showcase
similar architectures that capitalize on the traditional Cbl-binding
and radical SAM domains.[18,20,21] (A) OxsB is composed of four domains: an N-terminal domain of unknown
function (deep mauve), a Cbl-binding domain (purple), a radical SAM
domain (dark teal), and a helix bundle domain (blue). (B) Structure
of a homologue of the Streptomyces enzyme
TsrM has a domain arrangement similar to that of OxsB but lacks the
N-terminal domain and has an abbreviated C-terminal helical bundle
domain (blue). (C) TokK also has a domain arrangement similar to that
of OxsB but again lacks the N-terminal domain and showcases a new
architecture in the C-terminal domain (blue). In all panels, Cbl is
shown as pink sticks, SAM (aza-SAM in TsrM and SAM cleavage products
in TokK) is shown in light blue sticks, and the radical SAM [4Fe–4S]
cluster is shown in orange and brown spheres.
Cbl contains a corrin
ring that is decorated with acetamide, methyl,
and propionamide groups, as well as a dimethylbenzimidazole (DMB)
tail. This DMB tail can serve as a lower axial ligand to Co, an orientation
referred to as base-on, or with the DMB tail displaced from Co, which
is known as base-off.[9,10,18,53] The base-on mode of binding is found in
proteins that use variable architectures, whereas most Cbl-dependent
enzymes that bind Cbl in the base-off mode have been shown to use
a Rossmann fold that consists of a core set of five parallel β-strands
that are surrounded by helices (Figure A).[9,10,18,53] This latter base-off binding mode allows
the protein to tune the reactivity of Cbl using the protein environment
rather than the DMB tail.[53] For example,
the lower axial ligand to the Cbl of MetH is a conserved His residue
from an Asp757-X-His759-X-X-Gly762 motif[54] that is found on a six-residue loop (His loop in Figure A).[53] This basic His ligand in the His-on state is proposed to stabilize
the Me–Co(III) state of MetH and also be able to rearrange
to His-off to favor a square-planar Co(I) state.[53,55] Additional residues downstream of this motif in the residue sequences
Gly802-X-Ser804-X-Leu806 and Gly833-Gly834 are involved in hydrogen
bonding with N3 of DMB (Ser804), stacking against the axial His ligand
(Leu806), and forming a pocket that accommodates the DMB (Gly833-Gly834
residues) (Figure A).[53] This base-off, His-on mode is also
found in several other Cbl-dependent enzymes.[56,57] However, the three structurally defined Cbl-dependent radical SAM
enzymes described here bind Cbl in a base-off, His-off mode (Figure B–D).[18,20,21]
Figure 4
Cbl binds to the Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes OxsB, TsrM,
and TokK in a base-off, His-off mode. (A) In MetH, the closest ligand
to Co is a His residue found on the loop (“His loop”)
that connects β1 to α1 in the Cbl-binding domain.[53] The residues from the MetH Cbl-binding domain
that interact with Cbl are highlighted and shown as sticks, including
the lower axial ligand (His759), the GG motif, and the downstream
Cbl-binding motif (Gly-X-Ser-X-Leu). (B) The closest residue to Co
of Cbl in OxsB is found on the loop that connects β3 to α3
(Asn186).[18] Residues from the OxsB Cbl-binding
domain that are involved in Cbl-binding are highlighted, including
those that make up the GG motif, the downstream Cbl-binding motif,
and a GE sequence of residues found on α5.[18] The extra length of the “His loop” seems
to correlate with the positioning of the corrin ring close to the
radical SAM cluster (orange and brown spheres).[18] (C) The closest residue to Co of Cbl in TsrM is found on
the loop that connects β3 to α3 (Arg69).[20] Other residues of interest that interact with Cbl come
from the GG motif and the GE sequence found on α5. (D) Like
OxsB and TsrM, the closest residue to Co of Cbl in TokK is found in
the sequence Ala-X-Ser-X-Tyr-X-Trp.[21] Here,
Tyr maps to the position of Asn in OxsB and Arg in TsrM, but Trp is
the closest protein residue to Co. (E) The lower axial face of Cbl
in OxsB is found in a solvent-filled pocket.[18] (F) The presence of a large Arg residue on the long loop that connects
β3 to α3 in TsrM does not permit solvent to get near the
Co ion of Cbl.[20] (G) Similar to TsrM, the
lower axial face of Cbl in TokK is also solvent-free.[21] Panels E–G are each shown with a surface rendering,
and water molecules are shown as red spheres.
Cbl binds to the Cbl-dependent radical
SAM enzymes OxsB, TsrM,
and TokK in a base-off, His-off mode. (A) In MetH, the closest ligand
to Co is a His residue found on the loop (“His loop”)
that connects β1 to α1 in the Cbl-binding domain.[53] The residues from the MetH Cbl-binding domain
that interact with Cbl are highlighted and shown as sticks, including
the lower axial ligand (His759), the GG motif, and the downstream
Cbl-binding motif (Gly-X-Ser-X-Leu). (B) The closest residue to Co
of Cbl in OxsB is found on the loop that connects β3 to α3
(Asn186).[18] Residues from the OxsB Cbl-binding
domain that are involved in Cbl-binding are highlighted, including
those that make up the GG motif, the downstream Cbl-binding motif,
and a GE sequence of residues found on α5.[18] The extra length of the “His loop” seems
to correlate with the positioning of the corrin ring close to the
radical SAM cluster (orange and brown spheres).[18] (C) The closest residue to Co of Cbl in TsrM is found on
the loop that connects β3 to α3 (Arg69).[20] Other residues of interest that interact with Cbl come
from the GG motif and the GE sequence found on α5. (D) Like
OxsB and TsrM, the closest residue to Co of Cbl in TokK is found in
the sequence Ala-X-Ser-X-Tyr-X-Trp.[21] Here,
Tyr maps to the position of Asn in OxsB and Arg in TsrM, but Trp is
the closest protein residue to Co. (E) The lower axial face of Cbl
in OxsB is found in a solvent-filled pocket.[18] (F) The presence of a large Arg residue on the long loop that connects
β3 to α3 in TsrM does not permit solvent to get near the
Co ion of Cbl.[20] (G) Similar to TsrM, the
lower axial face of Cbl in TokK is also solvent-free.[21] Panels E–G are each shown with a surface rendering,
and water molecules are shown as red spheres.A comparison of the Cbl-binding domains of OxsB, TsrM, and TokK
to MetH reveals that the equivalent loops to MetH’s “His
loop” are longer and are notably missing histidine residues.
OxsB, TsrM, and TokK appear to modulate the reactivity of the Cbl
using distinct residues of motifs that are downstream of MetH’s
His motif. In OxsB, the loop connecting β1 to α1 is eight
residues longer than that in MetH.[18,53] The length
of this so-called “His loop” shields the Cbl-binding
site and seems to spatially dictate that Cbl sits approximately 4
Å away from the [4Fe–4S] cluster (Figure B). The closest protein side chain to Co
of Cbl is Asn186, which is located on the loop that connects β3
to α3 in a sequence of residues (Gly182-X-Ser184-X-Asn186) that
corresponds to the downstream Cbl-binding motif, for which the sequence
in MetH is Gly802-X-Ser804-X-Leu806.[18,53] Ser residues
of this motif hydrogen bond to the DMB of Cbl. Whereas Leu806 in MetH
stacks against the His ligand to the Co ion, Asn186 of OxsB is part
of a hydrogen-bonding network that anchors a water molecule in place
to serve as the lower axial ligand of Cbl (Figure B).[53] A similar
repurposing of this downstream Cbl-binding motif is also noted in
the structures of TsrM and TokK. In TsrM and TokK, the “His
loop” is 11 amino acids long, and the closest ligands to Cbl
arise from the loop that connects α3 and β3 (Figure C,D). In TsrM, the
closest residue to Co of Cbl is Arg69 (Gly65-X-Thr67-X-Arg69)[20] of the downstream Cbl-binding motif, and the
corrin ring is located 5.3 Å away from the [4Fe–4S] cluster
(Figure C). In TokK,
the closest residue is Trp76 (Ala-70-X-Ser72-X-Tyr74-X-Trp76)[21] of the downstream Cbl-binding motif, and Cbl
is approximately 6 Å away from the [4Fe–4S] cluster (Figure D). These large bulky
ligands in TsrM and TokK, unlike Asn186 in OxsB, create an environment
that occludes solvent from nearing the Co center of Cbl (Figure E–G).[18,20,21]The lower Cbl environment
in TsrM is reminiscent of that observed
in the RNA modification enzyme QueG, where water coordination at the
lower axial Co position is also prevented by a noncoordinating Arg
side chain.[58] However, the reactions catalyzed
are very different: QueG catalyzes an epoxide reduction in queuosine
biosynthesis and TsrM is proposed to facilitate a non-radical-based
methylation. In both cases, the lack of a lower ligand is expected
to facilitate a transition into the preferred four-coordinate geometry
for formation of a Co(I)–Cbl species. This ligand environment
in QueG is proposed to allow for formation of Co(I)–Cbl and
a subsequent Cbl-tRNA intermediate.[58] In
TsrM, this environment instead appears to be a design strategy used
to promote transfer of a methyl cation to substrate, permitting cycling
between Me–Co(III)–Cbl and Co(I)–Cbl states.[59] This proposal was recently described by Booker
and co-workers who posit that Arg69 weakens the Co–C bond and
favors nucleophilic displacement of the methyl group by the Trp substrate.[20,23] In TokK, Trp76 should also disfavor formation of a hexacoordinate
Cbl species. However, unlike TsrM, where substitution of the Arg residue
results in substantial activity loss, there is more flexibility in
the identity of the residue in this position in TokK.[21] This flexibility was recently demonstrated through mutagenesis
studies that showed that substitution of Trp76 in TokK with Phe, Ala,
or His had only a minor effect on activity.[21] This flexibility was not without limit, however. A Trp76Lys TokK
variant, which contains a longer positively charged residue than His
and more closely resembles TsrM, showed activity lower than that of
any other tested variants.[21] Although some
substitutions at the lower axial position of the Cbl may be tolerated,
collectively these results highlight the importance of local environment
in the tuning of Cbl chemistry to afford different reactions.Finally, OxsB, TsrM, and TokK all contain a conserved set of protein
residues that accommodate and interact with the DMB tail of Cbl. As
observed in MetH,[53] each of these proteins
contains one or multiple Gly residues on β4 of the Cbl-binding
domain that form a pocket to house the DMB and ribose of Cbl (Figure A–D). This
motif for base-off Cbl binding is known as the Gly-Gly motif. In all
three structures, a Gly-Glu residue sequence at the start of α5
in the Cbl-binding domain is also present. These residues engage in
two hydrogen bonds with the tail of Cbl (Figure B–D). This interaction (“GE”),
along with the longer “His loop” and the use of the
downstream Cbl-binding motif, appears to support the different reactivity
of these enzymes and the close juxtaposition of Cbl with the [4Fe–4S]
cluster and SAM found in the adjacent radical SAM domain (Figure B–D).[18]
Re-engineered Barrel Architecture Allows
for the Juxtaposition
of SAM and Cbl
Partial (β/α)6 and full (β/α)8 triose phosphate isomerase (TIM) barrel folds are common
to both radical SAM and Cbl-dependent proteins.[9,10] These
enzymes use barrels to bind their cofactors and substrates and perform
their reactions in an isolated environment. By sequestering reactive
intermediates within the protein architecture, these folds mitigate
the risk of propagating radical chemistry into the cell.[10] In Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes, as first
visualized in the structure of OxsB,[18] the
barrel fold is re-engineered via outward movement of each of the β-strands
in the barrel not only to bind the radical SAM machinery but also
to accommodate the corrin ring of Cbl (Figure A).[10,18] The [4Fe–4S]
cluster is ligated directly to Cys residues found in a Cys-X3-Cys-X2-Cys motif that follows the first β-strand
of the TIM barrel.[60,61] Together with SAM, the [4Fe–4S]
cluster occupies a traditional C-terminal position in the barrel (Figure ). Cbl, from the
Cbl-binding domain, also sits within the interior of the barrel but
is rotated 90° from its traditional position (Figure A).[18] The preferential placement of the radical SAM machinery in this
position and the conservation among the Cbl-dependent radical SAM
enzymes discussed here suggest that these enzymes are radical SAM
enzymes that have been repurposed to also bind Cbl.[10,18] Importantly, this arrangement creates an active site within the
barrel architecture where a substrate can bind and react with both
SAM and Cbl (Figures –5).[18,20,21]
Figure 5
Traditional SAM-binding motifs interact with Cbl. (A)
Despite housing
the corrin ring of Cbl (pink sticks) in the radical SAM domain (dark
cyan), OxsB, TsrM, and TokK[18,20,21] retain the traditional partial (β/α)6 TIM
barrel fold albeit with some deviations relative to the prototypic
radical SAM enzyme PFL-AE (PDB: 3CB8,[62] gray).
(B) The structure of OxsB has two orientations of SAM bound, one that
appears competent for radical chemistry (top, light blue) and one
that does not (bottom, brown). The aza-SAM in TsrM binds in a remarkably
different orientation that does not coordinate the [4Fe–4S]
cluster (light blue). TokK was crystallized with SAM cleavage products
(light blue). (C) OxsB has all characteristic radical SAM-binding
motifs, including the GGE (Glu363), ribose (Glu436), GXIXGXXE (Ile474),
and the β6 motif (Glu545).[18] In OxsB,
the GGE motif interacts with SAM, Cbl, and R323 (not shown). Following
a short α4a helix that connects β4 and α4, Lys448
interacts with SAM.[18] (D) TsrM also contains
the traditional SAM-binding motifs, including the GGE motif (Asp-271-Ser272-Glu273),
ribose (Asp335), GXIXGXXE (Leu379), and the β6 motif (Arg412).
Lys346, which follows α4a, also interacts with SAM. The GGE
motif in TsrM serves as a ligand to the radical SAM cluster in lieu
of SAM.[20] (E) Radical SAM motifs can also
be identified in TokK, including the GGE motif (Ala251-Asn252), ribose
(Gln312), GXIXGXXE (Ile351), and the β6 motif (Gly384). Arg234,
which follows α4a, coordinates to SAM. (F) In OxsB, residues
from the Cys loop (wheat) coordinate the [4Fe–4S] cluster,
interact with the GGE motif (Arg323), and interact with Cbl (His325-Lys326).[18] (G) In TsrM, residues in the Cys loop bind the
[4Fe–4S] cluster and interact with SAM (Glu236), Cbl (Glu 236
and Lys240), and the GGE motif (Glu236). (H) Finally, Cys loop residues
in TokK interact with Cbl (Arg204) and stack between cofactors (Trp215).
Traditional SAM-binding motifs interact with Cbl. (A)
Despite housing
the corrin ring of Cbl (pink sticks) in the radical SAM domain (dark
cyan), OxsB, TsrM, and TokK[18,20,21] retain the traditional partial (β/α)6 TIM
barrel fold albeit with some deviations relative to the prototypic
radical SAM enzyme PFL-AE (PDB: 3CB8,[62] gray).
(B) The structure of OxsB has two orientations of SAM bound, one that
appears competent for radical chemistry (top, light blue) and one
that does not (bottom, brown). The aza-SAM in TsrM binds in a remarkably
different orientation that does not coordinate the [4Fe–4S]
cluster (light blue). TokK was crystallized with SAM cleavage products
(light blue). (C) OxsB has all characteristic radical SAM-binding
motifs, including the GGE (Glu363), ribose (Glu436), GXIXGXXE (Ile474),
and the β6 motif (Glu545).[18] In OxsB,
the GGE motif interacts with SAM, Cbl, and R323 (not shown). Following
a short α4a helix that connects β4 and α4, Lys448
interacts with SAM.[18] (D) TsrM also contains
the traditional SAM-binding motifs, including the GGE motif (Asp-271-Ser272-Glu273),
ribose (Asp335), GXIXGXXE (Leu379), and the β6 motif (Arg412).
Lys346, which follows α4a, also interacts with SAM. The GGE
motif in TsrM serves as a ligand to the radical SAM cluster in lieu
of SAM.[20] (E) Radical SAM motifs can also
be identified in TokK, including the GGE motif (Ala251-Asn252), ribose
(Gln312), GXIXGXXE (Ile351), and the β6 motif (Gly384). Arg234,
which follows α4a, coordinates to SAM. (F) In OxsB, residues
from the Cys loop (wheat) coordinate the [4Fe–4S] cluster,
interact with the GGE motif (Arg323), and interact with Cbl (His325-Lys326).[18] (G) In TsrM, residues in the Cys loop bind the
[4Fe–4S] cluster and interact with SAM (Glu236), Cbl (Glu 236
and Lys240), and the GGE motif (Glu236). (H) Finally, Cys loop residues
in TokK interact with Cbl (Arg204) and stack between cofactors (Trp215).Similar to how the structure of OxsB uses architectural
features
found in the Cbl-dependent protein MetH, the radical SAM domain of
OxsB resembles that of the prototypical radical SAM enzyme PFL-AE.[18] Differences between OxsB and PFL-AE structures
include the presence of three extra helices following α5 in
OxsB, a long loop in place of β6, and a CX4CX2C cluster-binding motif rather than the typical CX3CX2C motif (Figure A).[18] Subsequently determined structures
of TsrM[20] and TokK[21] show broadly similar domain architectures and cofactor placement
to OxsB. Interestingly, TsrM and TokK do not share the differences
noted above between OxsB and PFL-AE (Figure A–C).
Repurposed Classical Radical
SAM-Binding Motifs Give Rise to
New Function
In the majority of radical SAM enzymes, three
irons of the [4Fe–4S]
cluster are coordinated by cysteines of the Cys-X3-Cys-X2-Cys motif, and the fourth iron is coordinated by the amino
and carboxylate moieties of SAM. SAM is further positioned in the
active site by residues of the partial TIM barrel that can include
a polar residue from the α4a helix in addition to a series of
classic SAM-binding motifs: GGE, ribose, GXIXGXXE, and the β6
motif.[60,61] Below, we consider a subset of these motifs
that appear to be the most altered when OxsB, TsrM, and TokK are compared
to non-Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes. Although structural data
on SAM binding is limited to OxsB, we can also utilize a TsrM structure
that has the SAM analogue, S-5′-azamethionine-5′-deoxyadenosine
(aza-SAM) bound, and a TokK structure that is complexed with SAM cleavage
products, Met and 5′-dAdoH (Figure A,B) in our analyses.The most interesting
variation in a motif is found in the so-called
GGE motif. The GGE motif, for which the residue identity varies, traditionally
provides a backbone hydrogen bond to the methionyl amino group of
SAM (Figure C–E).
However, in OxsB, the GGE motif (Ala361-Asp362-Glu363) also helps
to secure structural elements around Cbl. Glu363 hydrogen bonds to
a Cbl acetamide[18] and forms a salt bridge
to Arg323, a residue that is downstream of the CX4CX2C motif (Figure C,F). In TsrM, the side chain of Glu273 of the GGE motif (Asp271-Ser272-Glu273)
ligates the unique iron of the [4Fe–4S] cluster instead of
SAM ligating the cluster (Figure D), representing a substantial departure from other
radical SAM enzymes. In TokK, the GGE motif (Asp250-Ala251-Asn252)
appears more traditional in function if not in sequence, serving only
to hydrogen bond with the methionyl moiety of SAM and to orient SAM
for reductive cleavage (Figure E). Notably, SAM binds in two orientations in OxsB (Figure B): SAM binds to
the [4Fe–4S] cluster in the canonical orientation as well as
in a second orientation that loses the GGE interaction and does not
appear competent to generate 5′-dAdo• due to an increased
distance between the S atom of SAM and the [4Fe–4S] cluster
(Figure B).[18] This second orientation instead seems poised
to methylate Cbl and could represent an evolutionary relic of the
superfamily, simply retained as an orientation that could be sampled
to prevent formation of 5′-dAdo• in the absence of a
substrate.[18] Intriguingly, recent work
has shown that OxsB can convert both SAM into S-adenosylhomocysteine
(SAH) and dAMP into a methylated derivative.[19] These results suggest that the latter SAM binding mode may be competent
to form MeCbl and/or a methylated product.[19] However, the mechanism by which this methylated compound is formed,
the structure of this compound, and the relevance of this compound
(if any) to OXT-A biosynthesis await further discovery.[19]The Cys loops of OxsB, TsrM, and TokK
are also deserving of comment
as they have modifications that allow residues of these loops to interact
with the Cbl cofactors. In OxsB, two residues from the Cys loop, His325
and Lys326, are positioned to interact with Cbl (Figure F).[18] Likewise, in TsrM and TokK, Cys loop residues Lys240 and Arg204
interact with the Cbl DMB tail (Figure G,H). In addition, each protein has a residue in the
Cys loop, located two residues downstream of the Cys motif (Cys-X3–4-Cys-X2-Cys-X) that appears to help communication between SAM and Cbl.
In OxsB, this residue is Arg323, which as mentioned above interacts
with Glu363 from the GGE motif (Figure F). In TsrM, this residue corresponds to Glu236, which
like OxsB’s GGE motif residue Glu363, serves to hold SAM and
Cbl near each other by interacting with both the amino group of SAM
and an acetamide side chain of Cbl (Figure G). Finally, in TokK, residue Trp215 is found
at the analogous position and is sandwiched between the [4Fe–4S]
cluster and Cbl (Figure H). Based on the placement of this residue and experiments that show
mutation of Trp215 to Phe, Ala, or Tyr markedly affects product formation,[21] it is tempting to consider that this Trp residue
could serve as a conduit for electron transfer from the [4Fe–4S]
cluster to Co(II)–Cbl. This electron transfer step would generate
the needed Co(I) species for remethylation of the cofactor.A final structural commonality between OxsB, TsrM, and TokK is
the presence of an interaction between a polar residue from the α4a
helix of the radical SAM domain and SAM. This same interaction is
observed in the radical SAM enzymes BioB,[6] BtrN,[63] and QueE.[64] In OxsB and TokK, residues Lys448 and Arg324, respectively,
interact with the carboxylate of SAM (Figure C,E).[18,21] In TsrM, Lys346 from
this protein region instead interacts with the ribosyl portion of
SAM via ribose motif residue Asp335[20] (Figure D).Collectively,
these observations suggest that the more divergent
chemical roles played by members of the Cbl-dependent radical SAM
enzymes are supported, at least in part, by repurposing the canonical
radical SAM architecture. In particular, the use of the Glu of the
GGE to secure Cbl close to the radical SAM machinery in OxsB, potentially
aiding in electron transfer between cofactors (Figure C), is an appealing adaptation.[18] In TsrM, the use of the Glu of the GGE motif
to coordinate the unique iron of the cluster is a noteworthy modification
that likely blocks SAM from binding the [4Fe–4S] cluster, explaining
the lack of radical chemistry performed by TsrM (Figure C).[20]
C-Terminal Cap Domain is Involved in Substrate-Binding Conformational
Change
As described above, the arrangement of Cbl-binding
and radical
SAM domains in OxsB, TsrM, and TokK effectively creates an active
site where a substrate can bind and be positioned to react with both
SAM and Cbl (Figure ). However, for OxsB, there is not a substrate-bound structure available.[18] The inability to obtain a substrate-bound structure
has been suggested to be due to the “open conformation”
assumed by OxsB. In this conformation, the C-terminal helical bundle
domain is far from Cbl, and the active site is filled with solvent.[18] As this orientation would not be conducive to
radical chemistry, it has been hypothesized that a conformational
change that closes off the active site would correctly position the
needed residues for substrate binding (Figure D).[18] Nevertheless,
mapping of the substrate position from PFL-AE onto the active site
of OxsB reveals a location where substrate could bind and be poised
equidistant between the 5′-carbon of SAM and Co of Cbl (Figure A).[18] Consistent with the need for a conformational change to
mediate the correct contacts with substrate, the structure of substrate-bound
TsrM revealed that substrate binding is accompanied by a sizable 16
Å movement of a C-terminal domain loop to interact with substrate
and close off the active site (Figure D).[20] One interesting caveat
of this structure, however, is that the substrate does not appear
bound in a catalytically competent orientation.[20] This unproductive orientation is proposed to be due to
the presence of aza-SAM and HOCbl in the active site rather than the
native SAM and MeCbl cofactors. Even so, this structure coupled with
docking studies establishes a location for the active site that is
similar to the one proposed for OxsB, where a substrate could bind
to react with both cofactors (Figure B).[20] For TokK, there is
a substrate-bound structure that shows the carbapenam in a catalytically
competent orientation (Figure C).[21] The substrate is making contacts
with residues from both the radical SAM domain and C-terminal domain.
This structure provides an explanation for the observed nonprocessive
nature of the TokK catalyzed reaction in that a new molecule of SAM
cannot replace SAM cleavage products Met and 5′-dAdoH to afford
the second methylation while substrate is bound.[21]
Figure 6
Substrate binding in Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes requires
residues in the radical SAM and C-terminal domains. (A) Modeling of
the PFL-AE peptide substrate (cyan) into the active site of OxsB establishes
a position where substrate could bind to react with SAM and Cbl. (B)
Both the C-terminal domain (blue) and radical SAM domain (dark cyan)
comprise the substrate binding pocket in TsrM as mapped out by a structure
with substrate bound in a nonproductive orientation (cyan). (C) Like
TsrM, the substrate of TokK (cyan) is tethered in place by interactions
with residues from the C-terminal (blue) and radical SAM (dark cyan)
domains. (D) MetH has a Cbl-binding domain and a helix bundle domain.[53] The helix bundle domain acts as a cap that protects
MeCbl from being photolyzed and/or demethylated by an adventitious
biomolecule.[68] Like MetH, OxsB has a Cbl-binding
and a helix bundle domain (the N-terminal domain is omitted in this
panel for clarity). However, in the current structure of OxsB, the
helix bundle domain is displaced from Cbl, and the active site is
open. Although some movement of the bundle domain was observed in crystallo,[18] it has been proposed
that additional movement is likely to occur that will facilitate substrate
binding and catalysis. A C-terminal movement of TsrM residues Asn257
and Tyr259 found on a loop toward the substrate is observed through
comparison of the structures determined in the presence (blue) and
absence (dark red) of substrate.[20]
Substrate binding in Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes requires
residues in the radical SAM and C-terminal domains. (A) Modeling of
the PFL-AE peptide substrate (cyan) into the active site of OxsB establishes
a position where substrate could bind to react with SAM and Cbl. (B)
Both the C-terminal domain (blue) and radical SAM domain (dark cyan)
comprise the substrate binding pocket in TsrM as mapped out by a structure
with substrate bound in a nonproductive orientation (cyan). (C) Like
TsrM, the substrate of TokK (cyan) is tethered in place by interactions
with residues from the C-terminal (blue) and radical SAM (dark cyan)
domains. (D) MetH has a Cbl-binding domain and a helix bundle domain.[53] The helix bundle domain acts as a cap that protects
MeCbl from being photolyzed and/or demethylated by an adventitious
biomolecule.[68] Like MetH, OxsB has a Cbl-binding
and a helix bundle domain (the N-terminal domain is omitted in this
panel for clarity). However, in the current structure of OxsB, the
helix bundle domain is displaced from Cbl, and the active site is
open. Although some movement of the bundle domain was observed in crystallo,[18] it has been proposed
that additional movement is likely to occur that will facilitate substrate
binding and catalysis. A C-terminal movement of TsrM residues Asn257
and Tyr259 found on a loop toward the substrate is observed through
comparison of the structures determined in the presence (blue) and
absence (dark red) of substrate.[20]Collectively, conformational changes would seem
to be required
for substrate binding and/or product departure in all three of the
structurally characterized Cbl-dependent radical SAM proteins.[18,20,21] The region that moves in OxsB
and TsrM appears to be the helical C-terminal domain (Figure D). Interestingly, the use
of a helical domain to alter the accessibility of the upper face of
Cbl is out of the MetH playbook (Figure D).[53] In MetH,
a helical bundle domain protects the Cbl in the resting state[68] and must move to allow for catalysis. Although
domain arrangements and exact domain topologies are not strictly conserved,
these Cbl-dependent enzymes do appear to employ variations on a molecular
theme to afford sequestration and thus protection of their Cbl cofactors
during turnover.
Outlook
Twenty years ago, Sofia
et al.[1] used
bioinformatics analysis to put forth the proposal that a subset of
radical SAM enzymes would also be Cbl-dependent. This proposal was
based on the presence of sequence motifs that were similar to the
His-on/base-off Cbl-binding sequence motifs of MetH (Asp-X-His-X-X-Gly,
Gly-X-Ser-X-Leu, Gly-Gly). With the recent structure determinations
of OxsB, TsrM, and TokK, we now have experimental evidence that these
residues identified as having a binding Cbl function do, in fact,
bind Cbl and that the Cbl is base-off. Interestingly, the His loop
using sequence Asp-X-His-X-X-Gly, which was so important to Sofia
et al.’s prediction, turned out to be a bit of a red herring.
Although it is quite possible that some family members will employ
a His-on Cbl, we suspect that in the majority of cases, the “His
loop” will play a role in orienting the Cbl cofactor close
to the radical SAM cluster rather than in providing a histidine to
ligate the Cbl. We further anticipate that “Gly-X-Ser-Leu”
or the “downstream Cbl-binding motif” that provides
Asn186/H2O as a ligand to the Co ion in OxsB, provides
Arg69 in TsrM, and provides Trp76 in TokK will be a hotspot for substitutions
that customize the chemistry of these enzymes (Figure A,B). It has long been known that strength
of the Me–Co bond and the propensity for homolytic versus heterolytic
cleavage can be modulated by the identity of the lower ligand, making
substitutions in the “downstream Cbl-binding motif”
potentially chemically determinative. It is incredible that the three
structures determined thus far all appear to be in different subclasses
(Figure B), raising
the question of how many additional substitutions we should expect.
The Gly-Gly motif predicted by Sofia et al. to be a base-off Cbl motif
was correct. Outside the scope of the Sofia et al. paper, the structure
of OxsB revealed another motif for Cbl-binding: a Gly-Glu motif found
in α5 of the Cbl-binding domain and appears to aid in the relative
positioning of the radical SAM and Cbl cofactors (Figure A,C). Finally, additional hotspots
for chemistry-customizing substitutions can be found in the radical
SAM domain, including the Cys loop and the GGE motif (Figure A,C).
Figure 7
Hotspots in Cbl-dependent
radical SAM enzymes for binding cofactors,
tethering Cbl and SAM close together, and influencing reactivity.
(A) Topology diagram of OxsB that shows the Cbl-binding (purple) and
radical SAM domains (teal) that are also found in the other structurally
characterized enzymes TsrM and TokK. The C-terminal “cap”
domain is likely involved in conformational changes related to substrate
binding.[20,21] Residues involved in coordinating or creating
space for Cbl are highlighted as pink spheres, residues involved in
interacting with SAM are shown as blue spheres, and the Cys residues
involved in coordinating the [4Fe–4S] cluster are shown as
orange spheres. The location of the Cbl domain “His loop”
is shown in yellow. As described in the text, the downstream Cbl-binding
motif residues interact with Cbl and maintain the environment of the
lower axial face. The “His loop” and the GE residues
help spatially position Cbl. The radical SAM GGE motif serves additional
purposes in OxsB and TsrM[20] but is more
traditional in TokK. Residues from the Cys loop bind the cluster,
interact with Cbl, and facilitate communication between the cofactors.
(B) Different environments of Cbl facilitate formation of the needed
oxidation states for catalysis. There are currently four definable
classes including MetH. (C) Downstream Cbl-binding, GG, and GE motifs
are labeled in OxsB and TsrM from left to right in pink (top OxsB/TsrM
sequences). In addition, the Cys loop (Cys-X3–4-Cys-X2-Cys-X) and GGE radical
SAM motifs are labeled in blue (bottom OxsB/TsrM sequences). A sequence
alignment of TokK, ThnK, CysS, Swb9, and PctJ reveals conservation
of the downstream Cbl-binding, GG, GE, Cys loop, and GGE motifs. All
pink and blue dots correspond to the topology diagram shown in panel
A. A double dot is used for motifs that facilitate communication between
cofactors.
Hotspots in Cbl-dependent
radical SAM enzymes for binding cofactors,
tethering Cbl and SAM close together, and influencing reactivity.
(A) Topology diagram of OxsB that shows the Cbl-binding (purple) and
radical SAM domains (teal) that are also found in the other structurally
characterized enzymes TsrM and TokK. The C-terminal “cap”
domain is likely involved in conformational changes related to substrate
binding.[20,21] Residues involved in coordinating or creating
space for Cbl are highlighted as pink spheres, residues involved in
interacting with SAM are shown as blue spheres, and the Cys residues
involved in coordinating the [4Fe–4S] cluster are shown as
orange spheres. The location of the Cbl domain “His loop”
is shown in yellow. As described in the text, the downstream Cbl-binding
motif residues interact with Cbl and maintain the environment of the
lower axial face. The “His loop” and the GE residues
help spatially position Cbl. The radical SAM GGE motif serves additional
purposes in OxsB and TsrM[20] but is more
traditional in TokK. Residues from the Cys loop bind the cluster,
interact with Cbl, and facilitate communication between the cofactors.
(B) Different environments of Cbl facilitate formation of the needed
oxidation states for catalysis. There are currently four definable
classes including MetH. (C) Downstream Cbl-binding, GG, and GE motifs
are labeled in OxsB and TsrM from left to right in pink (top OxsB/TsrM
sequences). In addition, the Cys loop (Cys-X3–4-Cys-X2-Cys-X) and GGE radical
SAM motifs are labeled in blue (bottom OxsB/TsrM sequences). A sequence
alignment of TokK, ThnK, CysS, Swb9, and PctJ reveals conservation
of the downstream Cbl-binding, GG, GE, Cys loop, and GGE motifs. All
pink and blue dots correspond to the topology diagram shown in panel
A. A double dot is used for motifs that facilitate communication between
cofactors.Specific predictions based on
sequence can also be made using the
newly available structures.[18,20,21] As described by Booker and co-workers,[21] ThnK and CysS have sequence motifs in common with TokK (Figure C) that suggest that
a Trp residue will block ligation to the Co ion of Cbl in those enzymes
as Trp76 does in TokK (Figure D). We can also predict that ThnK, CysS, PctJ, and Swb9 will
use the “GGE motif” as traditionally employed by radical
SAM enzymes, assisting in SAM ligation to the cluster. This prediction
is based on the conservation of the TokK sequence, Asp250-Ala251-Asn252
(Figure C), which
occupies the location of the “GGE” motif in the TokK
structure. We additionally predict conservation of TokK’s Trp215
in ThnK, CysS, PctJ, and Swb9. Trp215 is one residue downstream of
the Cys loop motif (Cys-X3-Cys-X2-Cys-X-Trp),
and this Trp stacks between the radical SAM cluster and Cbl cofactor
(Figure C). Swb9,
like TokK, ThnK, and CysS, is implicated in catalyzing multiple methylation
reactions.[36] Currently, the reaction catalyzed
by PctJ is unknown, but based on residue conservation described here
and PctJ’s location in the SSN (Figure B), we suspect that PctJ will catalyze multiple
methylation reactions.Additional sequence alignments of OxsB
and TsrM with enzymes that
we categorize as nonradical methylases or non-methylases suffer from
low sequence similarity, making it difficult to pinpoint residues
in our predicted hotspots. Thus, despite the invaluable contributions
that the structures of OxsB, TsrM, and TokK have made to our understanding
of how Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes function, it is clear that
we still have a lot to learn. We suspect, in fact, that we have only
scratched the surface in our understanding of this enzyme family.
The uncharted regions of the SSN (Figure ) and the recent identification of family
member Mmp10, which binds Cbl in its C-terminal domain (rather than
the N-terminal domain),[65] are indicative
that additional studies are needed. Future mechanistic and structural
characterization of Cbl-dependent radical SAM enzymes will be essential
and will likely lead to new insights into the repurposing of traditional
motifs to give rise to new functions.
Authors: Williard J Werner; Kylie D Allen; Kaifeng Hu; Gregory L Helms; Brian S Chen; Susan C Wang Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2011-09-28 Impact factor: 3.162
Authors: Cody T Lloyd; David F Iwig; Bo Wang; Matteo Cossu; William W Metcalf; Amie K Boal; Squire J Booker Journal: Nature Date: 2022-07-26 Impact factor: 69.504
Authors: Jana Gagsteiger; Sören Jahn; Lorenz Heidinger; Lukas Gericke; Jennifer N Andexer; Thorsten Friedrich; Christoph Loenarz; Gunhild Layer Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 16.823